Don Saylor as expected is now County Supervisor Elect Don Saylor, in a few weeks on July 13 he will be sworn in as the new Mayor of Davis while in a few months he will resign to become County Supervisor, representing the second district in Yolo County which serves much of Central and most of West Davis.
In the coming weeks and months, it figures to be a hot-buttoned issue just how Don Saylor handles that transition. He has taken increasing criticism for his decision to wait until January to resign which would force the council to either appoint a replacement or cost a good deal of money to have an election.
The interesting question was going to be, how well he would perform at the polls on Tuesday. The question obviously would not be whether or not he would be elected, as the without competition thing kind of made that a moot point. The question is what percentage of the vote he would get.
The answer is that he got 64% of those votes cast from our calculations. Don Saylor received 3442 votes out of 5343 who cast their vote in the Second Supervisorial District. By contrast some other “controversial” figures scored a good deal higher. Matt Rexroad running unopposed in the Third Supervisorial District got 76% of the vote (4079 out of 5307). Mr. Rexroad received 600 more votes than Mr. Saylor with a smaller number of voters turning out. Sheriff Ed Prieto and District Attorney Jeff Reisig, both having been subjected to heavy criticism received 75% of the vote.
By contrast, Public Guardian Cass Sylvia was opposed by Elizabeth Barber, and yet received 73.5% of the vote against her largely unknown opposition.
In Davis, Joe Krovoza faced four challengers and yet received a vote from 59% of the people who voted in the city council race. Indeed, in their common precincts, Don Saylor received 3242 votes compared to Joe Krovoza’s 3148. Mr. Krovoza came within 100 votes of Mr. Saylor despite the fact that he had four opponents and Mr. Saylor was unopposed. And despite the fact that this was Mr. Krovoza’s first run for elective office.
The question is what is the cause of Don Saylor’s lackluster performance on election night.
It is true that he largely did not campaign for office once it was clear he would face no opposition. But that is true of Matt Rexroad as well.
The second Supervisorial District has never been Saylor’s strongest district. In 2008, he received 3251 votes in the district (with about 40.7% turnout compared to 31.8% turnout), but against five challengers (for three seats). In a one-on-one match up with Sue Greenwald, he bested her by just 318 votes with 52.6% of the two-way vote against Greenwald. That led many to believe he might be vulnerable to Sue Greenwald this time around.
The other factor is dissatisfaction with Mr. Saylor over his decision to stay on the council until January rather than resign earlier and possibly allow for the public to vote for a replacement in November. In April the Bee wrote, “A city councilman’s decision to stay in office could cost Davis taxpayers $100,000 or more – even as the city faces a $1 million budget deficit. Don Saylor is running unopposed for Yolo County supervisor in June. But he says he won’t resign from the council until he is sworn in as supervisor in January. That could force an expensive special election for his seat in early 2011.”
They continued, “With the city of Davis facing a $1.2 million deficit, why can’t Davis City Council member Don Saylor step down early for the good of the city, specifically to save money and to give voters a chance to elect their city leaders?”
The Bee then following the lead of the Enterprise, called on him to step down this summer and allow the city to run a replacement election in November. “Yolo County’s election officials say it will cost the city as much as $300,000 to hold a stand-alone special election to replace him. That’s money Davis can’t afford to waste. There’s a much cheaper alternative. If Saylor resigns in July, as the Davis Enterprise has urged him to do, his fellow council members can appoint a replacement to serve in his seat until the November general election, when his successor would be elected. The Enterprise and others have suggested that Davis council members appoint Saylor himself to the seat, a good idea, one that would clearly comport with the wishes of Davis voters who have twice elected Saylor to the council. Rather than pursue that sensible and cost-effective option, Saylor says he’s determined to remain in his council seat until he is sworn in as a Yolo supervisor in January.”
In response, Don Saylor wrote an op-ed in the Bee on April 18 claiming, “Davis council, not The Bee nor I, will find a successor.”
“This bizarre back room deal is questionably legal,” he contined, “would require me to abandon the commitment I was elected to fulfill and would rob a new council of the opportunity to make the less costly of the two lawful choices they have to fill the 18-month vacancy.”
Even Bob Dunning who generally has steered clear of criticizing Mr. Saylor has stepped into the fray, on April 11 he wrote, “Oh what a wicked lesson we learn when we decide to run for supervisor midterm. Don Saylor is learning that lesson first-hand as he continues to squander his once considerable political capital in a vain attempt to convince voters he really should hold on to his City Council seat until the last possible second before bolting for Woodland on Jan. 3.”
He continued, “Excuse me, Don, but the “I owe it to the voters” train left the station long ago. It left when you decided to vacate your council seat midterm to run for county supervisor. Aren’t these the same voters who elected you to a four-year term that you had only just begun when you started playing footsie with that great big supervisor’s chair in Woodland? Now, politicians change their minds all the time, and it’s certainly nothing new to see someone resign before his term is up to pursue another line of work. Otherwise folks in Illinois would be clamoring for Barack Obama to finish his U.S. Senate term. Still, it’s more than disingenuous to suggest you owe the voters a Jan. 3 finish date when the term they elected you to stretches far beyond that. They certainly didn’t vote for a lame duck, either, which is exactly what you have become with your elected term not yet half over. Let’s face it. Jan. 3 has nothing at all to do with what the voters had in mind when they elected you, and everything to do with when you will be sworn in as a county supervisor. If the swearing-in were scheduled for August, that’s when you’d resign.”
It is hard to imagine that this sort of criticism, has not harmed Don Saylor. That said, clearly Mr. Saylor has plenty of time to recover and repair his reputation. Two interesting factors now come into play. First, will this impact a decision to run for reelection in 2014. Second, incumbent Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada is also termed out in 2014. There is a widespread belief that Mr. Saylor would want to seek that seat. However, he is not the only competitor for it from Davis. Jim Provenza who represents the Fourth Supervisorial District and was elected in 2008, might have designs on that as well.
That would be one heck of a showdown if it materialized. However, my guess is that this current controversy will be long-forgotten by 2014. And all of this amounts to is some interesting analysis after the fact.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I am ABD: Anybody but Don.
His recent behavior is consistent with a record of personal ambition at the expense of serving his constituency. Lets hope he has an opponent who can defeat him in the future.
David quotes Dunning… apparently in agreement… one of the seven signs of the “end of the world”…
As if he really cares about constituents….His final aspiration is to figure out a way to put a Saylor clone on the Council. With Vergis failing once again to gain a seat, I’m sure Don is plotting behind the scenes to stick it to Davis-ites by forcing Vergis or another of his pro-development cronies on the Council. Like he cares that Davis is strapped for money, evidenced by his Council voting record that surely helped push us into the red. Let’s see how bad he can stick it to us over the next 6 months and then, from his County seat.
I realize the Saylor ‘solution’ will be up to the new CC (no thanks to Ruth who thought it should be on her watch) but would Don be eligible to vote or would he need to recuse or is that also unclear.
I would hope it would not go to the third vote getter.
Thanks DPD for analyzing this data and keeping us readers informed.
I would not be at all surprised if Don Saylor now “reconsiders” his decision to prevent his seat being filled by a Nov. election,essentially forcing his replacement to be appointed( the cost of a special election in these times probably makes it unlikely). The best hope for a replacement Whitcombe proxy on the Council now lies in a Nov. election strategy. With Vergis now rejected twice for Council by the Davis voters, her appointment to the Council is off the table. How about Lamar for a January appointment?. He will have settled in by then in his new martial life and the 6 mo. “breather” from the Council may be just what he needed.
“…my guess is that this current controversy will be long-forgotten by 2014.”
One political truth that I have seen played out in our local politics over the past 25 years is that Davis voters DO NOT forget or forgive what they perceive as a betrayal.
“in his new martial life”
Sorry Lamar… spelling error for marital was just that, unintended.
SODA: Don would have to resign for there to be a vacancy, therefore he cannot vote on his replacement.
davisite2:
martial…marital
a freudian slip?
should I put you on the couch?
The Davis Vanguard will be writing about Saylor for years as he does the quick step: going from County Supervisor to the Assembly to the Senate and, if he follows the Helen Thompson model, back to the County – good pay, benefits and pension. With no opposition no matter the low votes, it’s a win.
Don’s constituent work is some of the best I have ever scene. Honestly if there are things to criticize him about this is not one of them.
This Friday morning quarterbacking of the election is nonsense. Don’s race would have been hard fought if he had a credible opponent. Sue Greenwald’s failure to get out of the way in a timely fashion handed the race to Don. Its amazing that her sycophantic supporters have not been more critical of her saying as late as the week before the filing deadline that she was still deciding and then failing to file.
This nonsense about resigning is really dumb. A replacement will be appointed by the council and if they demand an election and waste a bunch of money it will be the fault of the council that can’t agree to appoint not Don’s.
Don Saylor: “I owe it to the people to serve 60% of the term they elected me to – and not a day less!”
I am glad to hear that Saylor is now so concerned about fiscal responsibility.
I wish he had been as concerned when the firefighter’s contracts were up or when he sold out Davis to developments (CV, WHR) that would cost the City money.
We are all constituents of Saylor and I don’t hear much praise in these quarters.
Good Riddance.
[i]”Don’s constituent work is some of the best I have ever scene. Honestly if there are things to criticize him about this is not one of them.”[/i]
I agree. The only experience I had with Don where I mentioned something he might look into — I didn’t really expect him to, though, because it was not that big of a deal — he got city staff to fix and let me know as soon as it was done.
I also know that as a member of the city council, Don worked very hard. Almost every time I traipsed down there to collect some information for my column, I would run into him.
I fault him, of course, for his infidelity to the taxpayers of Davis and for taking tens of thousands of dollars from the firefighters union and then making sure they got tens of millions of dollars in their contracts which will bankrupt our city. But I admire how much effort he put into being a member of the city council.
I don’t fault Don for his votes on questions of historical resources. I think he voted the wrong way most of the time on these issues. But there are quite a number of competing interests that a member of the city council has to consider; and it’s narrow-minded to think preservation should trump all other concerns.
Unfortunately, I do fault Don for his work as the liaison to the Historical Resources Mgt. Commission. In all the years I have served on the HRMC, Don was the council liaison and came to only one meeting in that capacity and stayed for only 10 minutes that one time. However, Don and really all of the current council have been good at promoting Davis history. Alas, we don’t have any money for promotions. Maybe if Don had not enriched all the firefighters …
Don Saylor will most likely serve satisfactorily as a diligent BOS bureaucrat but do not look for leadership or a vision for the future of our County. Ambitious apparachniks do not get-ahead with those attributes.
[quote] Sue Greenwald’s failure to get out of the way in a timely fashion handed the race to Don….Toad [/quote]Simply not true. In every public statement I made, I expressed my desire for someone else to come forward and run against Mr. Saylor.
Hilarious revision Sue. If you had not indicated an interest in running the entire Yolo establishment might not have consolidated behind Don. If you had indicated desisively that you would not run someone might have challenged Don, I also suspect that if you hadn’t made such a fool of yourself on the council you would have run but ultimately made he correct calculation that you would have lost and bowed out. Sadly you waited too long, in fact until the last minute, when Don had collected lots of money and endorsements because of you Sue and your actions. It froze out any challenger that might have surfaced. You gave Don the seat Sue. As they say in poker read it and weep.
Matt Rexroad running unopposed in the Third Supervisorial District got 76% of the vote (4079 out of 5307). Mr. Rexroad received 600 more votes than Mr. Saylor with a smaller number of voters turning out. Sheriff Ed Prieto and District Attorney Jeff Reisig, both having been subjected to heavy criticism received 75% of the vote.
This is all part of my plan to become the Mayor of Davis.
Matt Rexroad
662-5184
Note: It is now 76.8607499% of the vote — furthering my plan.
Matt Rexroad
662-5184
Mr. Toad: “You gave Don the seat Sue.”
I don’t think anybody could have challenged Don Saylor successfully. Comments on this blog notwithstanding, Don Saylor is very popular in Davis.
[edit]
Why are you all wrapped up in Davis politics. Call Lisa Jackson, head of the EPA and demand that they stop using Corexit to “clean” up the spill. Right now, in California the department of pesticide regulation has approved the use of methyl iodide, and toxic agricultural pesticide that is just about as bad as DDT!!!
Tell me people, how did this happen? How did these govt. agencies get so corrupt? How did it come to be, that in this “free” country, our politics are dictated by our pockets.
[edit — way off topic, and keep it civil, please]
Toad: If you are going to continue to insist on misrepresenting my words, you could at least have the courage to post under your real name.
Sue: In previous articles people have done a fine job giving reasons for anonymous posts. Childlishly dismissing a civil challenge on the basis of it coming from an anonymous poster is tired.
How is Mr. Toad misrepresenting your words? I do recall you wishing aloud that someone else challenge Don, but I don’t recall you ever removing yourself from that consideration. So what is being misrepresented?
What am I misrepresenting? Even as late as the week before the filing deadline you indicated you hadn’t made up your mind in the Enterprise. If you are opposed to someone being elected you don’t tease around with the idea of running and fail to file. If you do so you run the risk of running out the clock on others. Your behavior and rumors that you were going to run consolidated support for Don. It also might have kept others from considering a run.
Talk about Don’s ego for not leaving the council all you want but Sue’s selfishness in waiting until the filing deadline to not run after toying with the idea for months makes her the most important element in Don going unchallenged. All this analysis of the election returns are nonsense, Don won when nobody filed against him.
Mr. Toad: “Talk about Don’s ego for not leaving the council all you want but Sue’s selfishness in waiting until the filing deadline to not run after toying with the idea for months makes her the most important element in Don going unchallenged. All this analysis of the election returns are nonsense, Don won when nobody filed against him.”
I very much doubt whether Sue filed or didn’t file had much to do with the fact that Saylor ran unopposed, and more to do with the perception that Saylor had the strong backing of the local Democratic party machinery…
Not just the Dem party machine. When Don announced he had all sorts of support. Imagine Freddy Oakley and Lois Wolk, Mariko Yamada and Matt Rexroad all on the same stage. This all months in advance of the filing deadline. What brought all these personalities together from every corner of the Yolo county political spectrum? The thing that unified the political establishment behind Don was the thought of Sue running for Supervisor. As one supervisor told me “i probably agree with Sue more than Don but if Sue is elected I’m going to have to put up with her and I don’t want to be treated the way she treats Ruth.”
Hm. There are four supervisors. Which one said that so clearly that you can quote it verbatim months later? If you’re going to present something as a direct quote, you need to attribute it. If you’re paraphrasing, you should say so.
Again, though this may come as a shock to some folks here: Don Saylor is very popular locally. He has an extensive network of friends and supporters. Each of the folks you mentioned has worked with him and probably felt he would be best for the job.
It is accurate to the best of my ability and even if it isn’t perfectly correct all these months later it is a quite accurate recollection in both content and intent. Lets call it a paraphrase after the part about “I probably agree with Sue more than Don but if Sue is elected…”
By the way the reason I remember it is because I thought it was quite a statement at the time.